User talk:MX44


 * /Jyllands Posten

The Dark Side
Thanks for your words on my talk page. Wow, the Total Solar Eclipse was SOOOO awesome... truly a life changing experience... I think I will now make a point of going to see all remaining total solar eclipses that I can for the rest of my life. It was such a moving experience to have been able to connect to Astronomy, and the Universe on such a personal level like that. I also was quite impressed by Turkey. Although I didn't stay long I received a strong impression of the people who were proud, friendly and hospitable. I am sure that I will return to Turkey to discover more about that interesting country's cultures and ways of life. Netscott 11:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * So what are you doing in Aug. 2008? Want to go to Novosibirsk to catch some total solar eclipse action? Netscott 22:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * In 2008 I might be heading for Portugal, Caribia ... but in 2010 I could be in the South Pacific MX44 08:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Paris, Texas
Of course! LOL! Netscott 13:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

jesus cartoons
Where you wrote your friendly comment in the "< ! - - read the article", I can assure you that I was aware of what was in the article and all sub pages, and that I am in favour of cutting down on the text and moving much more to sub-articles. I am just wary of starting another edit-war by deleting something yet. One funny thing however, that I am wondering was this: When I followed the "history"-section

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy&diff=46784090&oldid=46756977

it looked like my little "addition" was the only addition to that section. However if one goes one step back to

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=46756977#Jyllands-Posten_rejects_Jesus_cartoon

, it is clear that there was a lot more text under the "jesus cartoons" section.

There seems to be some discrepancy between the "edit changes" section at the top of the "diff" section, and the actual differences. Can you see why this is, or is it simply some sort of technical glitch in wiki, do you think?DanielDemaret 18:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I did not expect the < ! - - to display anything deleted in bright red, of course, but I did expect the change to be visible in the edit section. But I see now how it does not have to be. Using < ! - - can be a bit sneaky, I see now, since anything that is "less visible" not only is less visible in the article, but if the area is large enough, one does not see the changes in the edit section, but one has to compare in the text. Not a glitch. And of course nothing wrongly done. I just expected every change in what was visible to be more clearly seen in the edit section. I have to look out for that next time I see a < ! - - . Take care.DanielDemaret 19:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Love that.... hehe Netscott 22:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Issues with statues
I seem to remember that you were involved in a discussion about the Buddha statues and the how and why of their destruction. Then, you'll probably find this interesting:  Azate 23:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Probably so. Hopefully at least. But the strange thing here is, what motivates the reversal of Al-Azhar's long-standing policy? I find it hard to believe that this targets statuettes of cats or Ramses on sale in Luxor, or present in Egyptian homes. Is Al-Azhar trying to outflank the Wahabbis on their home turf? Azate 07:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Beats me by one, and I play the Afghani prosecutors card "...he does not speak like a normal person!" MX44 08:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

UN report
There IS an official version out now, and in English, too. The report is certainly strange... The man has clearly never seen the cartoons. Also, he has the kid's book story all mixed up: He is apparently under the impression this is some propaganda effort: "The fact that children were the intended readership of the biography indicated a desire to shape the attitude to religion of a particularly sensitive and vulnerable age group". The report certainly makes for weird reading in some parts. Azate 22:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Odd. Works for me. Alternatrive link: 3rd row, the "E". Azate 22:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Beats me. Maybe cookie stuff. Both my links work for me. Your link says "no access" Try the homepage and search for "E/CN.4/2006/17" Azate 22:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Random comments
Stop the random editorializing in comments on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy now. You're simply being disruptive. -- Cyde Weys 18:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

religious racism
Please see anti-Semitism and Sectarianism for other examples of religious racism. Raphael1 15:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

semites
Palestinian Muslims are semites too, but they are not targeted by anti-Semitism. OTOH there are african Jews, who are not semites, but are targeted by anti-Semitism too. Raphael1 16:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Jewish_ethnic_divisions Raphael1 16:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

There are many kinds of racisms. Many, but not all of them are ethnical. Raphael1 23:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Casio.CZ.square.png & Image:Casio.CZ.saw.png
Thanks for uploading these images. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Renata 07:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

In and Out
Flitting in and out of WP these days eh? Hehe... Netscott 07:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I see, where'd you wikibreak to then? Netscott 07:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Been to Italy for a few weeks or should I say Napoli. Hiked around in the hills and mountains of the Sorrento peninsula, the Amalfi coast, Vesuvio, the works ... And yes, the women there really do bear a resemblence to Sophia Loren, and my wife tells me that the men are good looking as well. :-D
 * MX44
 * I see... heheh... I was in Rome a couple of months ago... and I agree the women are lovely. Netscott 07:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What I liked the most in Campania was the easy going style of life. I haven't had such many spontanious laughs together with people since ... since southern India? MX44 07:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Azate
Re: User:Azate, yes, he said he was quitting and asked for deletion of all his subpages. --Fang Aili talk 14:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Such a drag... but somehow understandable... I hope he comes back... damn respectable editor. Netscott 20:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it should somehow be possible to have an interresting life, also without Wiki-wars, no? But I am not sure ... can't ... remember ...
 * MX44 11:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I've never been a soldier and do not intend to become one either
Please remove your latest remark on Talk:Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy. I consider it to be a personal attack, since you are indirectly calling me a Nazi. Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Raphael1 18:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I am not indirectly calling you a Nazi. I am indirectly calling you a victim of propaganda. In this particular case, radical Islamist propaganda. MX44 07:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems plausible. Netscott 22:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Raphael1 and WP:COPYVIO
Sorry MX44 but your Jew re: suicide bombers commentary strikes me as being a little too over the top. That said I can understand the totality of your expressions in view of Raphael1's misrepresentation of the text he attempted to add. Netscott 14:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It was not my intend to offend (Ehh ..), I was only paraphrazing the words of Akiri when he was joking according to the Danish police investigation. MX44 00:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The real picture
Hello MX44, I just thought you should be aware of what User:Jeremygbyrne is generally referring to you as here. Netscott 10:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

"It" by any other name
Well generally in the media I'm familiar with there's always the original quote and when clarity is needed the [subject] is specified. Perhaps it's different in Scandanavia? Netscott 18:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well I've not seen it done relative to this type of quote. In my experience the original quote is left in tact and the [clarifier] is added next to it. I suppose it's a minor issue but I believe when it comes to actually quoting a person this is done so that the true nature of the original quote is maintained. ←Netscott→ 18:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll change it back if you'd like or I won't re-revert you if you do... "it" is a relatively minor issue frankly. :-) ←Netscott→ 19:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Relative to the language in the rest of the article the word "stultification" is going to stand out although, technically, it is likely the word you are in search of. How about lampoon? Look here for some other ideas. (→ Netscott ) 12:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The caption's much clearer now... looking good! (→ Netscott ) 18:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Casualties
Yes, it sums up to close to 1300, as the article's headline and intro says, so I don't understand why you reverted that to say "56" Isarig 06:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Your own edit summary on my Talk page lists over 350 people who were injured - not shell shocked, not peeing their pants - injured. You dishonestly changed this to 56, and are now trying to defend your deception. You are a liar. Please don't troll on my user page anymore, I have no use for liars. Isarig 07:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me?
Care to give a reason for reverting my edits?--Konstable 10:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Mushrooms
Nice radio link on you user page. :) JeffBurdges 22:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I am in no way affilated with that channel, but I do listen to it at times when I am working. The channel is Swedish as such but the wording of the link is Estonian, meaning:


 * I wish I was a bird ...


 * MX44 22:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Link in Ashdod article
I've deleted the link since it doesn't send to relevant page anymore. That is still correct. Please check your sources. However that is not the issue. In the past I've read the linked article and found it incorrect. There was a sentence of refugee walking in the streets of Ashdod and realizing that: "Here was a coffe shop and there was something else". Well, as local I can tell you that Ashdod & desolated ara village Isdud is not the same place at all. Isdud is located to South-East of Ashdod ~3-4km south from Ad Halom. It is even not in urisdiction of Ashdod, but in Beer -Tuvya regional council. You are wellcome to visit us and see it yourself. In the area can be found ruins of Han, mousqe, school & sheikh cave. So the story is not relevant. Please delete it yourself. Shmuliko 09:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The link points to the relevant place now again. If you do not read an article by that name there, then it is ". From what I can read out of sattelite pictures, it is correct that the modern city is not build excactly on top of the old ruins which are somewhat retracted from the sea.  The two sites are clearly in view of each other though and the historical references in the article appears to be correct. MX44 13:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For an even older discussion, back to biblical ages, see http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/discussion/096discuss.html which goes into greater detail about Ashdod on the Sea (the harbour) and Ashdod Inland. The 18th century painting at the top of the wikipedia article shows a palace or warehouse (or a fort?) right on the coast. To my knowledge, nothing remains of this as of today. MX44 14:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

"your government or ISP is censoring Internet traffic" - O' man, do you live in the Earth? It seems to be site failure, and today I can see it as well as Hezbollah site or other good guys stuff. So the sentence: "Here was a coffee shop and there was the school", he pointed out as he walked in the streets of Ashdod" is lying. By the way two sites are in view from mid90's, since "Tet neighborhood was established. I know my city history pretty well, by the way I have attached the painting. A lot of things remains from Ashdod on sea, so your knowledge is not full. Please find some pics here: http://www.ashdod.info/ashdod.html. But you'd better visit the area, Im sure you are expected to be surprised. Shmuliko 06:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The thing to be aware of here is that Ashdod, Isdud as well as Azotus are all pseudonymous. I see no reason to accuse anybody of lying here? Except for the obvious inconvenience of being reminded of the true ownership of the land your city is build upon. MX44 08:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was expected to be finished in something like that. In that logic the true ownership of half Poland is german. In that logic the true ownership of all lands from Jordan river to the sea is arab, and Israel should be deleted. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, Hassan Nasrallah and others can sign here. Is this your opinion? Shmuliko 15:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Another, very similar possibility is for Israel to incorporate the occupied territories in Israel proper, this time without expelling whatever remains of the population. This will of course never happen since, if we assume that all citizens should have equal democratic rights, Israel would then cease to have a qualified majority of jews. Perhaps one day when religion gets seperated from state.


 * It is not similar at all. It is absolute utopia for both peoples.
 * For example I can't propose to Norway to get into EU as part of Europe, because I'm not familar with material. In our case we talking about two very different societies. To respect both peoples is to let them decide.Shmuliko 15:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not more utopian than this was the original UN proposal of 1947 from the Arab states. The final outcome became to only respect the Jews, massively supported by American military aid. MX44 09:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Different time - different realities. Ask also what was the state of Palestine arabs, what were the arab countries, why it was direct way to war? At that time there was no american military aid at all, it started after growing of soviet influence in arab world and conversion of Israel to only american ally in the middle east. Remember also how was the country divided by UN and who started the war in 1948.
 * In fact I'm no interested in historical and political debate here. It is only about the link in Ashdod page. Please refer to my proposition below.Shmuliko 05:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm also interested: What brings you to judge in that complicative historical question, to study satellite pictures of far placed cities, to blame ridiculously somebody in censoring Internet traffic? Shmuliko 15:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * You told me that you couldn't access the page in question, although I had recently changed the link to its new location. Maybe you just didn't bother to check it out? MX44 08:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It is not the answer to my question, but responce is not obligatory of course :)

As for our issue. I think this link is more adequate in List of villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war or in naqba topics. It is not informative about Ashdod and on my opinion also not reliable (the reasons are above). Shmuliko 15:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

JPMCC
Yes, I'm going to be in and out for the next few weeks... your peer idea sounds good though... I'll get back to you more later on. 21:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * OK!!

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Music on Your User Page
What is that? It's pretty good. Alexwoods 14:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Swedish Mushroom Psychedelic Radio MX44 17:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD for Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy
You might not be aware but someone has just nominated Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy for deletetion and since it's an article you contributed to and the user who nominated has not put a note on your talk page I thought you might want to know. Fnagaton 23:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Muh-hund-originallit.JPG
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record: I have notified Vilks that his drawings are disputed under wiki rules and that if he wish them to stay, he can act like a mature person and upload them himself giving a proper license. This has not happened. MX44 (talk) 19:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Casio.CZ.saw.png
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Casio.CZ.saw.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Casio.CZ.square.png
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Casio.CZ.square.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply re image deletion
Hello...

In response to the WTF? message left on my talk page regarding the deletion of several images, first, I did not delete them, I simply nominated them. I am assuming you are talking about Image:Casio.CZ.saw.png and Image:Casio.CZ.square.png. Here is the to where these were nominated back on October 18th, and within each discussion you have commented on October 19th but did not address the issues noted. I would suggest contacting the admin who deleted the images on November 20th, User:Garion96; this contact is the first step to having them undeleted -- have a look at Deletion review. If you are unsuccessful in communicating with Garion96, may I suggest contacting either User:Calliopejen1 or User:Howcheng, both of whom are admins and know a fair amount about images here at WP. If there is anything else, please feel free to drop me a further note on my talk page. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 16:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No my friend, that's not going to happen. If you break a free gift, you get to keep both pieces! MX44 (talk) 18:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks? --Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)